Committee Summary for House Children and Family Law (01/21/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
Unclear 00:05:43.639 - 9:03:14 AM	General Working Session	Unclear
Unclear 00:20:16.480 - 9:17:47 AM	General Working Session	Unclear
HB170 03:03:24.640 - 12:00:55 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the division of military pensions during divorce proceedings.	Moffett, Michael(R)[B+]2025
HB178 04:03:44.880 - 1:01:15 PM	Public Hearing	relative to foster parent representation of foster children with disabilities.	Murphy, Nancy(D)[CT]2025
HB178 04:11:23.439 - 1:08:54 PM	Executive Session	relative to foster parent representation of foster children with disabilities.	Murphy, Nancy(D)[CT]2025
HB204 04:14:00.279 - 1:11:31 PM	Public Hearing	relative to criteria for reporting child support delinquencies to federal agencies.	Spillane, James(R)[A]2025
HB204 04:41:34.560 - 1:39:05 PM	Executive Session	relative to criteria for reporting child support delinquencies to federal agencies.	Spillane, James(R)[A]2025
HB213 04:43:50.480 - 1:41:21 PM	Public Hearing	relative to wage garnishment for child support.	Spillane, James(R)[A]2025
HB213 05:07:56.760 - 2:05:27 PM	Executive Session	relative to wage garnishment for child support.	Spillane, James(R)[A]2025
HB243 05:11:56.360 - 2:09:27 PM	Public Hearing	(New Title) relative to relative to the penalty for false reports of suspected abuse and neglect made to the division for children, youth, and families, and relative to the maternal mortality review committee, electric vehicle charging stations and fees for annual testing by the division of weights and measures, and relative to the acceptance of portraits of Senator Sylvia Larsen and Senator Jeb Bradley for the state house.	Spillane, James(R)[A]2025

Unclear: Unidentified Committee Chair Information Only00:05:43.639 - 9:03:14 AM; The committee chair opened the session and outlined the procedural rules for hearings, including the introduction of a 'beauty pageant' for department members to introduce themselves in a friendly manner. They emphasized the importance of starting hearings on time, the protocol for questioning witnesses, and the limitations on speeches and follow-up questions. The chair also discussed the process for voting on bills immediately after hearings, depending on the consensus and attendance of committee members. They mentioned the historical challenges of the committee and their approach to working collaboratively rather than confrontationally. The chair also noted that committee reports are due immediately after motions are made, and they are responsible for proofreading them before submission to the clerk.
Unclear: Unidentified Committee Chair Information Only00:08:44.120 - 9:06:15 AM; The chair continued to discuss committee procedures, stating that members who are bill sponsors or co-sponsors must choose between testifying or asking questions, but cannot do both. They also mentioned the potential for imposing a three-minute rule for testimonies during hearings and explained the process for expert witnesses from agencies or departments. The chair emphasized their approach to expedite bills after hearings if there is a clear consensus, but they would delay if the vote might be close or if amendments are expected.
Unclear: Unidentified Committee Chair Information Only00:11:51.279 - 9:09:22 AM; The chair discussed the history of the committee and its challenges, mentioning the attempt by Speaker Shan Jasper to shut it down in 2016, which was overruled by the House. They reiterated their approach to working collaboratively to solve problems rather than attacking people or departments. They also mentioned that the person who moves a motion during voting gets to write the committee report. The chair also addressed the status of the special committee on the Family Division of Circuit Court, noting that it will not be extended, but they could appoint a subcommittee to continue its work.
Unclear: John Williams, Department of Health and Human Services Information Only00:15:50.480 - 9:13:21 AM; John Williams, the legislative director of affairs for the Department of Health and Human Services, introduced himself and his history with the committee, starting from 1998. He highlighted his work with the division for child support services, now under the division for economic stability, and praised the leadership of past members. Williams presented a legislative contact list for the department and introduced the upcoming presentations from the Bureau of Child Support Services, the division for children, youth, and family, and the Bureau of children's Behavioral Health.
Unclear: Matthew Hayes, Bureau of Child Support Services Information Only00:18:35.720 - 9:16:06 AM; Matthew Hayes, a staff attorney and legislative liaison for the Bureau of Child Support Services, introduced himself and the bureau chief, Lisa dekowski. They were prepared to provide a brief overview of their agency and distribute copies of the agency overview. Hayes emphasized the usefulness of the contact list provided by John Williams for committee members to direct constituent inquiries appropriately.
Unclear: Lisa Decowski, Bureau of Child Support Services Information Only00:20:16.480 - 9:17:47 AM; Lisa Decowski, the Bureau Chief for the Bureau of Child Support Services, presented an overview of the services provided by her bureau. She has been with the program for nearly 11 years and with the Department of Health and Human Services for over 20 years. Decowski highlighted the mission of the child support program, which focuses on encouraging responsible parenting, family self-sufficiency, and child well-being. She detailed the services provided, including locating absent parents, establishing paternity, setting and modifying support orders, and enforcing court-ordered obligations. The program collects and disperses child support payments to help reduce child poverty and promote self-sufficiency. In fiscal year 2023, the program dispersed about $76 million to families in New Hampshire, with most of the funds going directly to families. The program operates under the Social Security Act and has been in existence for 50 years, with a recent shift towards a family-centered approach.
Unclear: Marie Nunan, Director for the Division for Children, Youth, and Families Information Only00:36:03.960 - 9:33:34 AM; Marie Nunan, the Director for the Division for Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), provided an overview of the division's mission and strategic priorities. Appointed in September 2024, she has been with DCYF for 25 years. Nunan emphasized the importance of partnerships with families and communities to ensure the safety and healthy development of children and youth. She outlined the three primary functions of DCYF: Child Protective Services, Juvenile Justice Services, and the Sununu Youth Services Center. She presented data on calls to Central Intake, new investigations, and open cases, showing trends from 2019 to 2023. Nunan also discussed the transformation efforts in Juvenile Justice since 2019, focusing on building alternatives and decreasing the number of youth in out-of-home placement. She outlined strategic priorities for 2025-2026, including case practice, service array, building a new Youth Development Center (YDC), and implementing a new electronic case management system.
Unclear: Susan Laraby, Chief of Legal, Regulatory, and Legislative Affairs, Division for Children, Youth, and Families Information Only00:36:33.720 - 9:34:04 AM; Susan Laraby, Chief of Legal, Regulatory, and Legislative Affairs for the Division for Children, Youth, and Families, provided an overview of DCYF's operations. She has been with the division for a year, previously serving as a prosecutor in Merrimack County and Brooklyn, New York. Laraby presented on the mission, data, and strategic priorities of DCYF, emphasizing the partnership with families and communities. She detailed the functions of Child Protective Services, Juvenile Justice Services, and the Sununu Youth Services Center. Laraby shared data on Central Intake calls, new investigations, and open cases, highlighting the trends and efforts to divert youth from formal Juvenile Justice involvement. She discussed the strategic priorities for the next two years, including enhancing case practice, expanding service array, building a new YDC, and implementing a new electronic case management system.
Unclear: Kya Fox, Director of the Division for Behavioral Health Information Only01:01:52.440 - 9:59:23 AM; Kya Fox introduced herself as the Director of the Division for Behavioral Health and acknowledged the committee's depth of experience in the field. She described the division's structure, which includes the Bureau of Children's Behavioral Health, the Bureau of Drug and Alcohol Services, the Bureau of Mental Health Services, and the Bureau of Homeless Services. Fox highlighted the division's role in addressing the needs of families regarding behavioral health conditions and emphasized the importance of the children's system of care, which is integrated and comprehensive in delivering publicly funded Behavioral Health Services to New Hampshire's children and youth.
Unclear: Daryl Tenny, Bureau Chief for the Bureau of Children's Behavioral Health Information Only01:04:12.680 - 10:01:43 AM; Daryl Tenny introduced himself as the Bureau Chief for the Bureau of Children's Behavioral Health and provided an overview of the children's system of care. He discussed the importance of a Continuum of Care to prevent high-level needs and highlighted various tiers of services, including early identification, community-based services, intensive community-based services, residential treatment, and acute care and crisis response. Tenny emphasized partnerships with other agencies and departments to support children's behavioral health across the state. He also mentioned the launch of the Children's Behavioral Health Resource Center website in January 2024, which helps families and providers navigate the system of care. Tenny concluded by discussing ongoing efforts to improve the system, including a system of care assessment process expected to produce recommendations in the spring of 2025.
Unclear: Judge Ellen Christo, Administrative Judge of the New Hampshire Circuit Court Information Only01:27:01.840 - 10:24:32 AM; Judge Ellen Christo provided an overview of the judicial branch, focusing on the Circuit Court and its Family Division. She discussed the mission of the judicial branch and the structure of the courts in New Hampshire, including the Circuit Court's role as the People's Court, handling a wide range of cases from divorce to minor criminal issues. Christo highlighted the high number of self-represented litigants and the efforts to support them through case managers and mediation. She detailed the processes for divorce and parenting petitions, emphasizing the importance of mediation and other alternative dispute resolution methods. Christo also discussed recent initiatives, such as the family treatment courts in Newport and Manchester, aimed at reunifying families affected by substance abuse, and mentioned ongoing efforts to train new judges and improve court services through technology and new programs like the pre-filing mediation project.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only02:00:10.119 - 10:57:41 AM; The speaker expressed appreciation for the information provided by Judge Ellen Christo regarding the court system's efforts with family treatment courts. They highlighted the significance of addressing generational issues such as alcoholism and drug addiction, which severely impact families and children. The speaker commended the efforts to help even if it's just one in ten families, indicating the importance of the program. They then inquired about the procedure for lodging complaints about judicial and court officer behavior, to which Judge Christo responded that there is an email system in place for such complaints, and depending on the nature of the complaint, it might be forwarded to the judicial conduct committee.
Unclear: Judge Ellen Christo, Administrative Judge of the New Hampshire Circuit Court Information Only02:00:58.320 - 10:58:29 AM; Judge Christo continued from the previous speaker's question about complaint procedures, explaining that the court has an email system for receiving complaints. She mentioned that while some complaints might be from disgruntled individuals due to case outcomes, others about judicial conduct would be referred to the judicial conduct committee. She emphasized that complaints about staff behavior should be directed to her office, and also mentioned the appeal process for those unhappy with case outcomes, distinguishing between complaints and appeals.
Unclear: Representative Georges Information Only02:02:33.320 - 11:00:04 AM; Representative Georges expressed excitement about the case management system discussed by Judge Christo. He inquired whether it was a new system, to which Judge Christo responded that it is not new but has evolved over time. She acknowledged that the system might be underutilized and suggested that better publicizing it could be beneficial. Representative Georges appreciated the information, noting that many in the community suffer from issues that could benefit from better awareness of the case management system.
Unclear: Representative Nelson Information Only02:04:05.760 - 11:01:36 AM; Representative Nelson requested an additional copy of the presentation for the committee assistant's file, which was readily agreed upon by the chair.
Unclear: Attorney Aron Crean, General Counsel for the Judicial Branch Information Only02:04:51.119 - 11:02:22 AM; Attorney Crean introduced himself to any new members and emphasized his availability and accountability to the committee. He noted the challenges of contacting court personnel and offered his contact information, encouraging the committee to reach out to him for any assistance needed. He aimed to facilitate communication between the committee and the judicial branch.
HB170: Representative Michael Moffett, Merrimack County District 4, representing Canterbury and Loudon Support03:03:24.640 - 12:00:55 PM; Representative Moffett, the prime sponsor of HB170, introduced the bill, emphasizing its focus on disposable military retirement pay. He argued that military retirement pay should not be considered a tangible asset or property in divorce settlements, highlighting the need for legislative action to address this issue. He pointed out a proposed change to RSA 458:16a that would exclude disposable retired pay from being considered property. Moffett stressed the importance of giving judges more discretion in divorce settlements involving veterans, drawing a parallel to a previous veterans court measure. He also mentioned the ongoing commitment of military retirees to national service and the need for better understanding and handling of military retirement pay in legal contexts.
HB170: Jim Maor, representing Northampton Support03:09:59.880 - 12:07:30 PM; Jim Maor, a co-sponsor of HB170, spoke in support of the bill, emphasizing its importance in addressing how equity in military pensions is handled during divorce proceedings. He highlighted the issue of how money can be categorized differently by the IRS or courts, which the bill aims to clarify and set into a more concrete policy. Maor expressed gratitude to the prime sponsor, Representative Moffett, and noted the bipartisan and nonpartisan nature of the issue, aiming to find a solution that benefits New Hampshire residents. He deferred detailed questions to subject experts present at the hearing.
HB170: Lou Jerus, State Representative from Ward S in Nashua Support03:12:51.120 - 12:10:22 PM; Lou Jerus from Nashua supported HB170, viewing it as a starting point for rethinking how military pensions are divided in divorce cases. He discussed the current system where a receiving spouse is entitled to 50% of the pension under the Hoskins rule for long-term marriages, and highlighted the ongoing nature of pension payments compared to other assets. Jerus suggested the need for a statute that gives judges more leeway to consider various factors such as the contributions of the non-military spouse and their own retirement benefits. He also touched on the negotiation aspect of asset division, noting that legal representation often plays a significant role in these proceedings.
HB170: Larry White, Retired Major, United States Air Force, Second Career Lawyer Oppose03:24:14.680 - 12:21:45 PM; Larry White, a retired Major from the United States Air Force and a second career lawyer, spoke on behalf of 250,000 retired military personnel nationwide, emphasizing his personal experience with the issue as he was married and divorced in New Hampshire. He explained the concept of disposable retired pay, which is the military retired pay after subtracting contributions to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and any disability payments. He highlighted that the U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld the exclusion of disability pay from disposable retired pay. White argued that military retirement pay should not be treated as a pension but as earned compensation subject to mandatory recall. He discussed the historical context, including the 1981 McCarthy v. McCarthy decision, and stressed that military retirement pay is considered property in divorce settlements but is taxed as income. He opposed mandatory, non-terminating payments post-divorce, sharing his personal experience of paying alimony for 24 years post-divorce. He also noted the national trend of moving away from lifetime alimony and the specific challenges faced by female service members, especially in abusive situations, under current law. He advocated for judicial flexibility in handling these cases to avoid a one-size-fits-all approach.
HB170: Anna Zimmerman, Former Family Law Practitioner Oppose03:37:20.880 - 12:34:51 PM; Anna Zimmerman, a former family law practitioner who worked extensively with military pensions, expressed concerns about HB170. She detailed how disposable retired pay is calculated, including deductions for SBP and VA disability payments, referencing the U.S. Supreme Court case Howell v. Howell. Zimmerman clarified that only the portion of a military pension accrued during marriage is subject to division, similar to other pensions, and refuted the notion that a teacher's pension might not be subject to division. She argued that the bill would carve out military pensions from equitable division, potentially leaving military spouses without a fair share of marital assets. Zimmerman emphasized the partnership in military marriages, with spouses often sacrificing their own career advancement to support their service member partner. She concluded that the bill would unfairly strip military spouses of benefits that other pension holders retain, and criticized the lack of judicial discretion the bill would impose.
HB170: Kevin Grady, State Veterans Advisory Committee, Town of Hooksett, New Hampshire Information Only03:44:37.239 - 12:42:08 PM; Kevin Grady, a 25-year Air Force veteran and 27-year resident of Hooksett, New Hampshire, spoke as the legislative chair of the State Veterans Advisory Committee. He explained that the committee reviewed 17 bills in the current session and took positions on them. For HB170, the committee decided to follow the bill without taking a position due to hesitancy on the language. Grady then spoke personally as a divorcee who pays a percentage of his military retirement to his former spouse. He explained the history and revisions of the Former Spouse's Protection Act, highlighting its original intent to protect military spouses who might be left with no work experience or pension after a long military marriage. He noted the changes in 1986 and 2017, which excluded disability pay and adjusted how retirement pay could be calculated for divorces post-2017. Grady emphasized that federal law already allows judges discretion in handling military retirement in divorce cases, and passing HB170 would remove this discretion. He mentioned his current military spouse's interest in speaking on the issue.
HB170: Frank Kin, Retired Navy, Town of North Hampton, New Hampshire Oppose03:50:10.120 - 12:47:41 PM; Frank Kin, a 21-year retired Navy veteran from North Hampton, spoke against HB170, expressing concerns about the federal law's impact on military retirees. He argued that military retirement pay is not property but income, and criticized the law for allowing former spouses to receive payments even after remarriage or under different personal circumstances. Kin referenced the Baker v. Baker decision in New Hampshire, which supported the notion that military retirement lacks property characteristics. He highlighted the inequities he perceived in the current law, including situations where former spouses continue to receive payments under various conditions. Kin also noted the increasing number of female military veterans affected by this law and urged the committee to consider these issues.
HB170: Roberta Grady, Resident of Hooksett, New Hampshire Support03:55:37.239 - 12:53:08 PM; Roberta Grady, a resident of Hooksett and former military spouse, shared her personal experiences to illustrate the challenges military spouses face. She described her career disruptions due to multiple military relocations, from New Hampshire to Alabama, Germany, Texas, and Japan, where job opportunities were limited, often temporary, and without pension or promotion prospects. Grady emphasized her advocacy for the Former Spouse's Protection Act, despite not personally benefiting from it due to her short marriage. She recounted her role in helping other military spouses find employment, particularly highlighting a case of a dentist unable to practice in Japan. Grady argued that military spouses make significant sacrifices and deserve consideration in divorce settlements, supporting the existing federal law's discretion for judges to decide on sharing military retirement pay.
HB178: Representative Dancy Murphy, Hillsboro County District 12 Support04:03:44.880 - 1:01:15 PM; Representative Murphy introduced HB178, focusing on her personal and professional experiences with special education and foster parenting. She emphasized the importance of clear and concise special education laws, particularly in the context of foster parents' roles in educational decision-making for children in care. She highlighted that HB178 aims to remove redundant and confusing language from RSA 186-C:14-a, specifically the phrase about the foster parent's knowledge and skills, which is already mentioned elsewhere in the statute. She urged the committee to support the bill to enhance clarity and effectiveness of the law.
HB178: Bonnie Dunham, Resident of Merrimack, New Hampshire Support04:06:49.000 - 1:04:20 PM; Bonnie Dunham, with experience as an educational surrogate parent and trainer, testified in support of HB178. She explained the critical role of parents in the special education process and the necessity of appointing surrogate parents for children without legal parents. She discussed the streamlined process for foster parents to become educational decision-makers, emphasizing the need for clarity in the law to avoid confusion. She supported the bill's aim to remove redundant language that could complicate understanding of the process.
HB178: Chair Information Only04:11:23.439 - 1:08:54 PM; The chair opened the executive session and moved for an 'ought to pass' recommendation on HB178. The motion was seconded by Representative Greg, and a roll call vote was conducted, resulting in a unanimous decision to pass the bill with a vote of 15-0 and one absence.
HB204: Representative Chairman James Fainer Information Only04:14:00.279 - 1:11:31 PM; Representative Fainer opened the hearing on HB204 and noted there were no objections to moving it to a consent hearing.
HB204: Representative Murphy Support04:14:12.239 - 1:11:43 PM; Representative Murphy presented HB204, explaining that it addresses a personal experience of being reported delinquent on child support due to a misalignment of payment schedules. The bill seeks to ensure that the Department of Child Support Services reports the actual dollar amount of any delinquency to federal agencies and does not report delinquencies unless they meet the federal threshold. Murphy highlighted the importance of transparency and accuracy in reporting to prevent issues like passport denials due to minor discrepancies in payments.
HB204: Representative Greg Information Only04:18:45.520 - 1:16:16 PM; Representative Greg asked Representative Murphy to clarify the amount of the delinquency reported in his case, which was around $6, and questioned the frequency of such occurrences. Murphy confirmed that the issue affects many individuals and provided data from previous research showing similar incidents.
HB204: Representative Rice Information Only04:22:06.920 - 1:19:37 PM; Representative Rice sought clarification from Representative Murphy about whether he had ever reached the federal delinquency threshold of $2500, to which Murphy responded that he had not, due to wage garnishment, but still faced issues due to payment timing.
HB204: Attorney Matthew Hayes, Bureau of Child Support Services Information Only04:23:07.640 - 1:20:38 PM; Attorney Hayes introduced himself as the legislative liaison for the Bureau of Child Support Services and expressed hope that HB204 would pass successfully this time.
HB204: Attorney Matthew Hayes, Bureau of Child Support Services Information Only04:23:28.439 - 1:20:59 PM; Attorney Hayes clarified that the Bureau of Child Support Services is neutral on HB204. He mentioned that the bureau already complies with the bill's requirements, and passing the legislation would not cause harm. He discussed the reporting of child support arrears to the federal agency, stating that it occurs when the arrears reach a threshold of $2500. Hayes explained the electronic transmission of balances to the federal agency and how they affect passport status, noting that the process is automatic and based on monthly updates. He also responded to questions about what happens when arrears reach zero, indicating that the system should automatically notify the federal agency to restore passports, though he was unsure about the specific data entry process.
HB204: Representative Deimon Information Only04:26:14.000 - 1:23:45 PM; Representative Deimon questioned Attorney Hayes about the specifics of reporting zero balances to the federal government. He asked if the agency specifically reports when arrears reach zero, to which Hayes responded that it should be automatically reported as zero when it is, although he was not certain about the exact data entry process.
HB204: Representative Greg Information Only04:29:38.920 - 1:27:09 PM; Representative Greg expressed concerns about the potential for system errors in the reporting process, given that it involves two technological spaces - the state's reporting and the federal system's response. He questioned how breakdowns could occur across these systems, to which Hayes responded that theoretically, the systems should communicate correctly, but he was unsure of the specifics on the federal end.
HB204: Representative Raymond Information Only04:30:55.159 - 1:28:26 PM; Representative Raymond asked about the frequency and conditions of reporting to the federal agency, specifically whether the state reports all arrears or only those that meet the $2500 threshold. Attorney Hayes clarified that only arrears meeting the threshold are reported, and he also mentioned another threshold of $500 for a different intercept but focused on the $2500 threshold for the discussion.
HB204: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:31:58.800 - 1:29:29 PM; The speaker inquired about the reporting mechanism for individuals who are consistently behind on payments by a few hundred dollars. They asked if these individuals are reported repeatedly or only once they reach a certain threshold, specifically $2,500. The response indicated that individuals are reported until their balance reaches zero.
HB204: Representative Rice Information Only04:32:38.319 - 1:30:09 PM; Representative Rice asked if individuals are notified by the division when they are in arrears (AAR). The response clarified that notifications for the offset program come from the federal child support agency once individuals meet a certain threshold.
HB204: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:33:29.438 - 1:31:00 PM; The speaker questioned whether individuals receive a notice from the federal child support agency only when they reach $2,500 in arrears or if they get notified at lower amounts like $200. The response was that notifications are sent when meeting the threshold for federal programs. The speaker also asked about the availability of an automated telephone line for checking owed amounts, expressing concern about individuals being set up for failure if not notified until reaching $2,500. The response indicated that the agency sends out various notices at different stages of the case.
HB204: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:35:04.599 - 1:32:35 PM; The speaker mentioned difficulties with sending emails to a group, suggesting a potential glitch in the system. They questioned if such glitches could cause issues for individuals in the state. The response was that the speaker could not comment on specific cases but noted that any issues brought to their attention would be looked into on a case-by-case basis.
HB204: Representative Price Information Only04:36:41.080 - 1:34:12 PM; Representative Price asked if passing the bill would fix any system glitches. The response was that they were not aware of any glitches but would look into individual cases if brought to their attention. The discussion also touched on whether passing the bill could have unintended positive effects, suggesting a 'pass it and see what happens' approach.
HB204: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:39:07.680 - 1:36:38 PM; The speaker asked about the notification process for delinquent payments, specifically whether notices come from the federal government or the state. The response clarified that federal notices are sent once the threshold is met, but the state also sends notices at different stages of the case for different reasons.
HB204: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:40:07.240 - 1:37:38 PM; The speaker asked about the treatment of individuals with less than $2,500 in arrears. The response was that the state has other remedies to enforce cases at different levels of delinquency.
HB204: Representative D Simon Information Only04:41:34.560 - 1:39:05 PM; Representative D Simon moved for the bill HB204 to pass during the executive session. The motion was seconded by Representative Georges.
HB204: Clerk Information Only04:42:03.958 - 1:39:34 PM; The clerk conducted a roll call vote on the motion for HB204. The vote resulted in 14 in favor with no opposition and two absences, leading to the motion passing.
HB204: Chair Information Only04:42:54.440 - 1:40:25 PM; The Chair confirmed the passage of the motion for HB204 and inquired if there were any objections to the bill going on consent. The session concluded with Representative D Simon receiving paperwork to write the committee report.
HB213: Representative Chairman of Fish, Game, and Marine Resources Support04:43:50.480 - 1:41:21 PM; The Representative introduced HB213, which seeks to inform parties during the final decree of a divorce about their right to opt out of wage garnishment for child support if both parties agree. The bill was previously passed by the committee and the House but did not pass the Senate. The Representative shared personal experience to underline the necessity of the bill, emphasizing the need for clear communication from courts about existing rights regarding child support payments. The bill includes exceptions where opting out of garnishment would not be allowed, such as in cases with protective orders, out-of-state parties, or existing delinquencies on child support.
HB213: Representative Raymond Information Only04:46:03.200 - 1:43:34 PM; Representative Raymond discussed the committee's previous work on a form related to HB213, which was intended to be used at the final disposition of divorce cases to allow both parties to opt out of wage garnishment. There was confusion and discussion about the development and existence of this form, with some members recalling its creation, while others were unsure. The Judiciary had previously objected to creating such forms.
HB213: Unknown Information Only04:48:22.480 - 1:45:53 PM; The speaker expressed concern about the creation of a new form by the courts as mandated by the bill, noting that it would incur costs and thus require a fiscal note. They highlighted that Representative Raymond, despite her willingness, is not legally licensed to create such forms without cost. The discussion shifted to the need for a fiscal note, and the committee researcher was tasked with finding out if the creation of a form would indeed necessitate one. The hearing on House Bill 213 was then concluded, with the executive session put on hold pending the researcher's findings.
HB213: Chair Information Only05:07:56.760 - 2:05:27 PM; The chair opened an executive session to discuss House Bill 213, focusing on the need for a fiscal note due to the creation of a new form as required by the bill. They explained that the session was to request the budget office to prepare a fiscal note, not to decide on the bill itself. The motion to request a fiscal note was seconded by Representative Greg, and the chair emphasized that this action was taken to be responsible with the bill, acknowledging the costs associated with outsourcing form creation to resources outside the courts.
HB213: Committee Members Information Only05:09:30.280 - 2:07:01 PM; The committee members voted unanimously in favor of requesting a fiscal note for House Bill 213. The vote was recorded as 14 in favor, with no opposition, and the motion was to ask the budget office to prepare the fiscal note. There was some confusion about how to document the request, but it was agreed that it should be sent to the budget people without being recorded on a green sheet.
HB243: Representative Chairman Support05:11:56.360 - 2:09:27 PM; The representative introduced House Bill 243, explaining that it aims to penalize false reports of child abuse and neglect made to the Division for Children, Youth, and Families. They noted that the bill had been passed through the House three times in the previous term but was not passed by the Senate. The bill seeks to address the weaponization of the reporting system and includes penalties for both false reporting and professional mandatory reporters who fail to report abuse. The representative highlighted the bipartisan support for the bill and its intent to prevent malicious reports while encouraging non-anonymous reporting.
HB243: Representative Greg Information Only05:14:33.878 - 2:12:04 PM; Representative Greg requested clarification on the bill for the benefit of new committee members. The representative explained that the bill encourages non-anonymous reporting but does not prohibit anonymous reporting. They detailed new language drafted with the prior director of DCF, which includes optional warnings about potential criminal and civil penalties for malicious or harmful false reports. The bill also addresses professional mandatory reporters who fail to report abuse, ensuring they are not immune from penalties.
HB243: Representative Raymond Information Only05:20:31.558 - 2:18:02 PM; Representative Raymond, with experience in child protective services in New York, discussed the implications of the bill on anonymous reporting. They noted that the bill does not change the ability to report anonymously, and questioned how it would impact malicious anonymous reports. The representative shared that in New York, despite similar laws, prosecutions for false reporting were rare. They sought to understand how the bill would address the continued issue of anonymous malicious reporting, to which the representative responded that while they would prefer to remove anonymous reporting, the current bill at least addresses known malicious reporters.
HB243: Representative Information Only05:24:06.680 - 2:21:37 PM; The representative asked about the definition of a professional mandatory reporter and whether it applies to professionals outside their work environment, such as a doctor witnessing abuse at a public place like Walmart. The discussion revolved around whether a professional mandatory reporter's obligation extends beyond their professional setting and if there could be penalties for not reporting in such situations. The committee suggested further research into this matter, especially in relation to existing statutes and potential amendments.
HB243: Representative Rice Information Only05:27:22.558 - 2:24:53 PM; Representative Rice highlighted concerns about the language in the bill that gives the Department discretion to inform complainants about potential criminal and civil penalties for malicious or harmful complaints. They questioned the use of 'may' instead of 'shall' and discussed the implications of this discretion on how the Department handles reports. They also inquired about existing laws regarding civil action against false reports, sharing a personal experience of the costs associated with defending against a false claim.
HB243: Susan Larby, Division for Children Youth and Families Information Only05:30:34.638 - 2:28:05 PM; Susan Larby, representing the Division for Children Youth and Families, provided insights into the bill's impact on their operations. She explained that the Department preferred the change from 'shall' to 'may' regarding informing callers of potential liabilities to avoid deterring callers from providing crucial information. She highlighted the importance of gathering detailed information from callers for effective investigations and mentioned the low rate of anonymous reports. Additionally, she clarified the definition of a professional mandatory reporter as outlined in RSA 169-C:29, which lists professions with mandatory reporting obligations.
HB243: Representative Sidel Information Only05:34:54.200 - 2:32:25 PM; Representative Sidel asked for clarification on the RSA cited by Susan Larby regarding mandatory reporting and whether it includes carve-outs for privileged communication. Larby confirmed that the professions listed in the statute are assumed to have professional confidentiality attached due to their licensing, although it's not explicitly stated in the RSA.
HB243: Representative Raymond Information Only05:35:56.920 - 2:33:27 PM; Representative Raymond inquired about the staffing of the Central Intake hotline, asking if the workers were similar to dispatch officers or social workers. Susan Larby explained that during the day, the hotline is staffed by Child Protection social workers, while after hours, including weekends and holidays, it is staffed by traditional dispatchers under contract with a facility in Massachusetts.
HB243: Emily Lawrence, Waypoint Information Only05:37:29.798 - 2:35:00 PM; Emily Lawrence from Waypoint was recognized, but the transcript does not provide further details on her testimony beyond acknowledging her presence and complimenting her penmanship.
HB243: Emily Lawrence, Waypoint Oppose05:38:07.080 - 2:35:38 PM; Emily Lawrence, advocacy director at Waypoint, expressed opposition to HB243, focusing on the potential chilling effect on reporters. She argued that the bill might deter individuals from reporting due to fears of interference in family life and the complexity of the reporting process. Lawrence highlighted concerns about domestic violence situations where the bill could be weaponized against victims. She suggested that if the bill were to pass, clarity regarding professional mandated reporters should be improved and alternative penalties to immediate misdemeanor charges should be considered, citing examples from other states like Massachusetts, Maine, and Connecticut.
HB243: Jody Nelson, Senior Clerk Information Only05:46:55.840 - 2:44:26 PM; Jody Nelson shared a personal anecdote about a false report against her daughter's daycare provider, illustrating the impact of such reports on daycare facilities and families. She noted that the report led to immediate disruption as families had to find alternative childcare during the investigation. Nelson's testimony highlighted the broader implications of false reporting beyond just family disputes, affecting community services like daycares.
HB243: Lisa Masio, Associate Child Advocate, New Hampshire Office of the Child Advocate Oppose05:50:22.718 - 2:47:53 PM; Lisa Masio opposed HB243, emphasizing its potential to limit child abuse reporting and create a chilling effect. She argued that the bill's language could deter good faith reports and complicate the work of DCYF by shifting their focus from child protection to assessing caller intent. Masio criticized the bill's use of terms like 'false' and 'unfounded', noting the difficulty in proving intent and the potential for increased litigation. She stressed the importance of broad reporting laws to protect children, citing instances where numerous reports were screened out before serious incidents occurred, underscoring the need to prioritize child safety over penalizing reporters.
HB243: Katherine Shay, Gilmanton, mother of two sets of teenage twins Support06:08:02.638 - 3:05:33 PM; Katherine Shay expressed strong support for the bill, highlighting her personal experiences and the broader implications of false allegations in family law and child protection cases. She described how false accusations have severely impacted her family over a decade, leading to physical and mental health issues, and significant financial burdens due to legal fees. Shay emphasized the lack of repercussions for those making false claims, which she believes contributes to a cycle of harm and injustice. She urged the committee to pass the bill to address these issues and protect families from such malicious actions.
HB243: Adam Kaufman, business owner with a daughter Support06:13:49.280 - 3:11:20 PM; Adam Kaufman supported the bill, sharing his ordeal with multiple DCYF cases against him during his divorce, which he believes were weaponized to damage his life and family. He discussed the emotional and financial toll, including the necessity of hiring a lawyer to navigate the system and protect his daughter. Kaufman highlighted the injustice of being treated as guilty until proven innocent and the lasting impact of these accusations on his family's well-being, despite eventually gaining custody of his daughter.
HB243: Frank Karan, supporting the bill with personal justification Support06:20:06.638 - 3:17:37 PM; Frank Karan testified in support of the bill, recounting a case where false allegations of child abuse were made against him and his girlfriend, Stacy, during a grandparents' visitation dispute. He described how these accusations, made by Stacy's daughter, Shelby, were motivated by financial disputes over benefits and custody. Despite the allegations being unfounded, there were no consequences for Shelby, and the family continued to suffer from the fallout, including being denied visitation rights. Karan stressed the need for legislation to address the harm caused by false reporting in child protection cases.

DeSimone, Debra(Chairman)(R)[B+]2025	Nelson, Jodi(Clerk)(R)[B]2025	Rice, Kimberly(V Chairman)(R)[B-]2025
McMahon, Charles(R)[B+]2025	Love, David(R)[B+]2025	Pearson, Mark(R)[B]2025
Korzen, Lori(R)[B+]2025	Georges, Mary(D)[D-]2025	Raymond, Heather(D)[CT]2025
Gregg, Alicia(D)[D-]2025	Petrigno, Peter(D)[F]2025	Grossman, Gaby(D)[IN]2025
Levesque, Cassandra (D)[D-]2025	Malone, Amy(D)[D-]2025	Markell, Jay(R)[B]2025